
Journal pudge's Journal: No One Is Right But Me (and Gonzales)! 3
AP: "Attorney General Alberto Gonzales approved plans to fire several U.S. attorneys in an hourlong meeting last fall, according to documents released Friday that indicate he was more involved in the dismissals than he has claimed. Last week, Gonzales said he 'was not involved in any discussions about what was going on' in the firings of eight prosecutors that has since led to a political firestorm and calls for his ouster."
Me: "Gonzales never stated or implied he was not involved in the actual firing of the attorneys, which is what this meeting was about. He only stated he was not involved in the process of determining which people would be on the list of people to be fired."
Gonzales: "When I said on March 13th that I wasn't involved, what I meant was that I had not been involved, was not involved in the deliberations over whether or not United States attorneys should resign.
silly (Score:2)
jason
Sampson: Gonzales was involved in firings (Score:2)
Sampson: Gonzales was involved in firings [msn.com]
Democratic panel chair Leahy says Justice Dept. motivation was improper
WASHINGTON (AP) - Attorney General Alberto Gonzales wrongly stated he was not involved in discussions about the firings of federal prosecutors, his former chief of staff told the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday.
"I don't think the attorney general's statement that he was not involved in any discussions of U.S. attorney removals was accurate," testified Kyle Sampson, who quit this month as G
Re: (Score:2)
"I don't think the attorney general's statement that he was not involved in any discussions of U.S. attorney removals was accurate," testified Kyle Sampson, who quit this month as Gonzales' top aide. "I remember discussing with him this process of asking certain U.S. attorneys to resign."
OK. If true, this changes nothing I said, of course, since I was only referring to the lack of any evidence that Gonzales had made a false statement; the only "evidence" that his previous statement was false was that he was involved in a meeting later, after the process had completed, to approve of the firings, and this evidence self-evidently did not conflict with his earlier statement.
So, what discussion was this? When was it?
Sampson said Gonzales attended a crucial meeting on the firings Nov. 27, 10 days before they were carried out.
*facepalm*
So, Sampson is wrong too. Neat!
This is getting old and boring. L